Trying to fine tune POJA without much success.

I have some questions.

One thing I have read...POJA is NOT about sacrifice.

Where is the fine line between operating in Giver mode and sacrificing?

How do you know when you are operating in Taker mode and when you are just being selfish?

I had a lead on an idea, but I couldn't get it to go anywhere for me.

I was thinking that if:

The Giver's Rule is...do whatever you can to make others happy and avoid anything that makes others unhappy even it it makes you unhappy.

The Taker's Rule is...do whatever you can to make yourself happy and avoid anything that makes you unhappy, even if it makes others unhappy.

Is it only selfish if it makes others unhappy?

When is it okay to be selfish and when is it NOT okay?

I'm thinking Dr. Harley should devote a whole book to POJA or make some kind of crafty form to fill out with questions and everything.

Frozen - I'm going to sidestep your question and talk about the elephant in the room instead.

I've been reading your posts for a long time now and one thing always jumps out at me:

You do not trust Patriot. Period

There. I said it.

From what you have said, your relationship started in deception and dishonesty. Ever since then, you have attempted to love someone you do not trust. That's the reason for the endless analysis and examination of yours and Patriot's every word and deed and emotion.

You are struggling desperately to make sense of loving someone whom you do not trust.

Unless and until Patriot finds a way to truly earn your trust, I think you will be struggling like this forever.

What could he do that would truly make you feel safe with him -- that would truly let you feel he is a man you can TRUST?
Mulan

Thank you for your candor, Mulan. It's one of the things I love about you.



Be honest.

I should probably say CONTINUE to be honest, lest anyone misunderstand my meaning or think I am attacking Patriot.

(Btw, I really am serious about the POJA question.)

Frozen,
I agree that Harley hasn't done a good job of explaining the POJA, but he did devote a whole book to it. It's called "Buyers, Renters, or Freeloaders" or "The One". There's a whole thread on it started by Pepperband.

Here's excerpts from a radio show that I typed up on POJA:
The Policy of Joint Agreement is never do anything without an enthusiastic agreement between you and your spouse. It seems like a radical idea, but it’s not so radical if you have a philosophy of marriage which is that I need to take your feelings into account whenever we make decisions so I need to think about you because every decision we make affects each other.

Anytime one person does something without considering the other person’s feelings, that’s independent behavior. If I were to ask you, “How do you feel about my job, my recreational activities, the purchase I’m about to make…” If the answer to any of those questions is “I wouldn’t be very enthusiastic about it,” especially if I wouldn’t be at all happy about it, and I were to say, “But it’s so important to me…If you really cared about me, if you really loved me, if you really thought about me, you would let me do something that I want to do even if it makes you suffer.”

The problem is that I wouldn’t be very caring towards you if I were to go ahead with that decision. In marriage, you shouldn’t let the other person suffer. If you were to say to me, “I am willing to suffer for you”, if I care about you, I won’t let you do it. Now if I were to say, “Great! Great! Because I’ve been wanting to do this, and I’ve been wanting to do that…You’re willing to suffer, so I’m going to let you suffer…” What kind of a husband would I be if I were to agree to something like that?

We’ve got options. We’ve got alternatives. If we say, “No, we’re not going to do this,” there are a million alternatives. If on the other hand I say, “Yes, you can do that and I’ll suffer,” we’re stuck with one alternative where you feel good and I feel bad. Instead, you can end up with another alternative where you’re both doing well.

The thoughtful thing always is to find out how other people are going to be affected by your behavior. That’s thoughtful. And then the next step you want to do is make your choices with their feelings in mind along with your own feelings. I don’t think you should sacrifice for others, and I don’t think you should expect them to sacrifice for you. You instead should make decisions that take both of you into account simultaneously."

Basically, the POJA is about FIRST eliminating any option which is good for one and bad for the other. Then it is about finding something which works for both.

Harley sent me this email on the private forum. I hope it's OK to repeat it here:
While I know that you understand the philosophy behind the POJA, it doesn't hurt to restate it once in a while, particularly when there's so much religious confusion on the subject.

In a unilateral relationship, sacrifice sometimes makes sense. For example, a parent's care for a child can be self-sacrificing because we want our child to gain, even if it's at our loss. And we do it with enthusiasm. The same is true when we help the poor. We are willing to lose our hard-earned resources so that those without can survive. But in a bilateral relationship, personal sacrifice makes no sense at all. That's because when two people are bonded to each other in marriage, each person's gain or loss is reflected in the other. I cannot sacrifice for Joyce without her suffering as well. She cannot sacrifice for me without my suffering. The two of us have become one.

It's only when the two are still two that a husband and wife even think about violating the POJA. If they were one, they would feel the pain of their own thoughtlessness, and avoid hurting each other. So the POJA is a rule for couples who have not yet bonded so that they can treat each other with as much sensitivity as couples that have bonded.

Sacrifice makes sense in marriage when both spouses enthusiastically agree to give up something for a higher calling. For example, they can both enthusiastically agree to give up personal advantages so that their children can have an advantage. Or they can both agree to sacrifice their hard earned income so that the poor can survive. In other words, the POJA does allow for sacrifice, but only when it's mutually agreed to with enthusiasm.

But when one spouse wants the other to sacrifice his or her interests for personal gain, it makes no sense if they are both bonded to each other. Those moments of selfishness and shortsightedness cry out for a guiding principle to keep the couple focused on their care for each other when they have lost their way. And that principle is the Policy of Joint Agreement."

To be honest, I dropped insisting on time together to focus on the POJA. It seemed that it wasn't following the POJA to insist on time together. We went through one entire year of my trying to follow the POJA as a way to model that it would be good for both of us. My husband then tried to leverage the fact that I wanted to bring the kids two miles away for a couple of hours to visit with my parents (my parents had flown in from NJ on the way to the Mayo Clinic where my 80 year old father was having heart bypass surgery) to get me to agree to his taking the kids by himself to his hometown 200 miles away for several days. I thought that was utterly heartless, dropped the POJA for time together, and gave him an ultimatum to spend 15 hours per week with me or move out.

The POJA, it appears, is about getting to know each other and creating empathy so that you only do what both want, but that empathy needs time together alone. I put the cart before the horse. 2005 was a complete waste of time. I don't know how the ultimatum will turn out, but I do know that we aren't living together unless we spend 15 hours per week alone together.

To your specific questions, the Giver has a tendency to agree to solutions to problems which are good for the other but not for the self (win-lose). The Taker has a tendency to agree to solutions to problems which are bad for the other but good for the self (lose-win). The POJA forces the couple to keep talking until both are happy with the solution (win-win), although the ultimate solution may not have been the first choice of either. For example, one time, Tom wanted to take the kids to a ballgame, I suggested a trip to the Minnesota Zoo, and he said he preferred the Como Zoo. We were both happy going to the Como Zoo.

Cherished

Cherished,

Thanks for that.

Maybe the new book needs to move up in priority on the reading list.

Frozen,
I added a last paragraph to what I wrote. The book was published in 2002 -- I remember it well because of what was going on in my life at the time. It is now out of print, but I think you can still get it. The quote in my byline is from page 44 of that book. I typed it up at one point and showed it to my husband. He crumpled up the paper in anger.
Cherished